About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
't think you can trust -- >> senate majority leader harry reid says he hopes gun legislation will come out of the judiciary committee but he was noncommittal over whether he would sign an assault weapons ban. >> would you vote for it? >> frankly, she knows, i haven't read her amendment, i didn't vote for the assault weapons last time because it didn't make sense but i'll take a look at it. >> i will bring in "washington post" columnist ruth marcus and senior staff writer for "the hill" alex bolton. good monday morning to both of you. ruth, this is the president's first big sell to the american people. what do you think he needs to say here? >> well, the president said he was going to give it everything he's got. i think what he needs to say is look, don't listen to the nra, listen to logic or listen to the nra from a number of years ago when it supported universal background checks. i think that there are three issues here in order of likelihood. one is background checks which has huge support and makes complete sense. one is limits on magazine sizes which i completely think the administra
debate, then we might not be having this debate right now. the deal harry reid cut with mitch mcconnell is coming back to bite them. they could have gone for a lot more. they backed off. they shook hands again and went with something milder and then boom, he gets clowned two mornts later. >> nia malika, i want to be real clear. the filibuster has been around for decades. but its use has exploded in this past few years. in fact, two of the three sessions of congress with the worst filibuster abuse have happened under president obama. so let me just cut to the chase. is the gop's obstruction about policy? or is it just something personal about president obama. >> well, it's probably a little bit of both. it's about policy. it's about this president whose policies they vehemently disagreed with. harry reid had a chance to go for a more full-throated filibuster. but his reasoning was that when the democrats are in the majority -- in the minority and that could happen, this next election, that they want to have that same leverage that republicans have been using with this filibuster r
. this is really up to the president. he could drive 1.7 miles to have a conversation with harry reid what they will do to avert this from happening. instead he is pointing fingers at congressional republicans who twice voted for replacement plan to do something about these but, absent the president's leadership, absent harry reid doing anything we'll not sit here to debate against ourselves. it is time for real leadership out of washington and we're not seeing that. dennis: president obama has been warning us, women and poor children, will go without being able to eat if we have the sequester cuts. yet he hasn't scheduled an emergency meeting at white house until friday. the cuts have to go into place according to congress based sometime on friday. is he taking this seriously enough? >> i don't think so. i mean if you actually look, he is something like 5,000 miles on nrcc.org. you see the video. we talk about that he has flown 5,000 miles for campaign rallies seemingly for re-election he already won. i don't understand where his quote, unquote leadership is coming in this. we want to ave
critical. because harry reid decided not to do full-on filibuster reform, he still has to get through the senate and with 60 votes. and on the house side, obviously, the same thing applies. now that john boehner has broken the rule, that he's willing to move bills through with democrats as well as republicans, he still needs to hold together enough democrats so you don't see them walk away with some of these ideas. the main thing that the president has going for him is not so much the party unanimity. they are almost sort of left out in the cold because the establishment is pushing them back. they no longer have an interest in them. they want them to sit down and be kwooit because they're embarrassing them. >> five days before the state of the union address and the president seems to have done well pushing forward on his agenda. got passed the fiscal cliff. immigration front and center. gun control ledge slax and everyone some bipartisan group members of congress coming together on that. it looks as though he's been able to, in some ways, get them to soften on some of their hard posit
, instead of trying to protemenen, harry reid needs to remove the gavel. when the new york times is raising questions about his fitness to serve in light of, you know the allegations out there. what does at that tell you? that tells me that there's a problem. >> it tells me there's a problem with the newspapers. i don't know whether or not the new york times, and members of the senate unless there's something in the constitution i overlooked. >> sean: let me ask you a question about you. here you are, the head of the powerful house ways and means committee. you guys are in charge of writing tax law. and then all of these ethics issues comes out on you, and taxes. seriously, why did you allow that to happen knowing you spent all these years in congress and that that was going to hurt your reputation, why didn't you just pay the bill? >> actually, that case is not really over. and according to my counsel, jay goldberg, i don't think it would be proper for me he to discuss it further on your show, but i tell you one thing, when it is over, you'll be the first one to get the answers. >> sean: t
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)